Swiss Move to Stop Radicle Islam!

[Black Dog]

I read the articles and i read where the author thinks the vote will do nothing to stop it however the Swiss Population do not see it that way......

Can you provide some evidence to show the Swiss actually feel that this vote will stop radical Islam? Because I'd hate to think the Swiss are really that stupid.

Rather, I suspect the Swiss who voted for this ban were largely unconcerned with "radical Islam" or terrorism and more concerned with the question of what to do about all these uppity brown folks.

[Guest American Woman]

....I've no doubt that that the Swiss voted in favor primarily because they don't have much Islamic extremism—and they don't want any, either. Anne Applebaum, a Washington Post and Slate columnist

There is ... nothing especially Swiss, or especially isolationist, about last week's referendum result. A similar question, put in a similar way, might well have had a similar result anywhere in Europe. In fact, fear of Islamist extremism now shapes all European politics far more than anyone ever acknowledges. The growth of the so-called "far-right" parties in the recent past is almost always connected to fear of Islamist extremism.

link

"Instead of condemning the Swiss out of hand, we should try to understand what they meant to express and what so many people in Europe feel, including people in France." French president Nicolas Sarkozy

From the same article: ....newspaper opinion polls in Spain, France and Germany since last week's referendum have shown large majorities supporting a ban on minarets.

link

Edited December 9, 2009 by American Woman

[naomiglover]

I am against religious extremism and at the same time, even though I am an atheist, I am also a big advocate of freedom of religion and expression. I feel that many of the Western laws that are in place, protect the society from different forms of religious extremism that many fear would override our laws.

I believe the Swiss overreacted.

I wonder what percentage of the Swiss actually participated in the voting.

[Black Dog]

....I've no doubt that that the Swiss voted in favor primarily because they don't have much Islamic extremism—and they don't want any, either. Anne Applebaum, a Washington Post and Slate columnist

This decision has been interpreted across Europe, and particularly in the United States, as evidence of Swiss bigotry and rising religious intolerance. But it was not—or, at least, not entirely. It was evidence of fear, though not fear of "foreigners" or "outsiders" as such.

...

In fact, fear of Islamist extremism now shapes all European politics far more than anyone ever acknowledges. The growth of the so-called "far-right" parties in the recent past is almost always connected to fear of Islamist extremism.

As though fear and bigotry and religious intolerance are separate concepts. Those driven by fear of Islamic extremism aren't all that interested in distinguishing between real extremism and the threat it may pose and the willing participants in the social fabric who happen to be practising Muslims. For the fearful, Islamic extremism and Islam as a whole are one and the same. There is, therefore, no difference between "fear of Islamic extremism" and good old fashioned xenophobia.

To argue otherwise is akin to suggesting those who spread the blood libel weren't afraid of or intolerant toward Jews as a whole, just those Jews who eat babies. A distinction without a difference.

[GostHacked]

I am not sure why you have such a hard time understanding this issue?? The Swiss had a national Issue and they decided to have a referendum to decide said Issue (much like we did over the Quebec issue a few years back) they took a vote and that was that! 57% of the Country supported the ban so the problem was solved!.....you can't get anymore democratic than that. I find it Ironic the same people who complain and whine about the Swiss ban are the same people who say we should not interfere in Afghanistan it's their business we should stay out of it..........not meaning you necessarily but some of the other poster's.

IN that cause, I would support it if there was a 70% or more yes-vote on the ban. 3% difference is not a lot. It's really a 50/50 thing here. And this is democracy. 51% controls the other 49%.

[Guest American Woman]

IN that cause, I would support it if there was a 70% or more yes-vote on the ban. 3% difference is not a lot. It's really a 50/50 thing here. And this is democracy. 51% controls the other 49%.

Where are you getting a 3% difference from? The vote was approved 57.5 percent to 42.5.

Edited December 9, 2009 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

I wonder what percentage of the Swiss actually participated in the voting.

2.67 million voters out of 7.5 million people, with somewhere in the neighborhood of 20% being under voting age. I'll let you do the math.

[wulf42]

Can you provide some evidence to show the Swiss actually feel that this vote will stop radical Islam? Because I'd hate to think the Swiss are really that stupid.

Rather, I suspect the Swiss who voted for this ban were largely unconcerned with "radical Islam" or terrorism and more concerned with the question of what to do about all these uppity brown folks.

And you can prove this??

[Black Dog]

And you can prove this??

No, because, as the words "I suspect..." clearly imply, it's my opinion, not a factual claim on my part.

Your turn: can you prove how banning minarets will stop radical Islam? Failing that, can you at least prove that Swiss voters beleive banning minarets will stop radical Islam?

[GostHacked]

Where are you getting a 3% difference from? The vote was approved 57.5 percent to 42.5.

Missread it. But even at 15% difference between the two is not that wide of a margin.

[Peter F]

Terrorism wins again! Now Swiss muslims are feeling like their country is out to get them. There isn't a Minaret in this world that has any effect on religious radicalism. This Swiss ban on minarets for mosques doe's absolutely nothing to stop Muslim radicalism. That is an obvious fact - even to Wulf.

So, if the ban on minarets has zero to do with religious radicalism - and I note that Wulf is the only one who claims it does -

Then wtf is the point? To inhibit them somehow? to restrict muslims in some way or other? Or is it just so's non-mulsims can feel like they have some sort of control of thier lives?

Since this ban is entirely without rational point it makes me think that this minaret ban is only the first step - There's more to come.

Again the west plays right into Osama's hand.

[wulf42]

No, because, as the words "I suspect..." clearly imply, it's my opinion, not a factual claim on my part.

Your turn: can you prove how banning minarets will stop radical Islam? Failing that, can you at least prove that Swiss voters beleive banning minarets will stop radical Islam?

The Swiss the minarets as a growing Islamic influenece in the Country and the Swiss see what is happening in Britain and France with Islamic radicals and i would think they fear the same happening to them. Swiss women in particuliar are worried about their hard fought freedoms and liberty are at risk according to this article.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6936267.ece

[Guest American Woman]

Missread it. But even at 15% difference between the two is not that wide of a margin.

It's a much bigger percentage than POTUSes have been elected by. Whether the margin is wide or narrow really makes no difference regarding the end result, unless the law states that in order to pass, it must receive a specified majority. As it stands, "majority rules."

[JB Globe]

I read the articles and i read where the author thinks the vote will do nothing to stop it however the Swiss Population do not see it that way......funny you left out the part of the articles that states Islamic Extremist's are making inroads in Switzerland (Washington Post) which also answers your question #2 about the vote...so i guess you pick and choose what to read.

On the Washington Post article - it appears that whatever small amount of radicalism exists in Switzerland (and the article makes it clear it's small) it suggests that the threat can be dealt with using police and security powers. Which makes a minaret ban (the effectiveness of which hasn't been explained or proven by anyone yet) seemingly unnessecary. This becomes even more unessecary when you consider the amount of damage Switzerland's reputation has taken recently because of it.

Nice job on poaching that one from DogonPorch, btw.

On Sarkozy - why on earth would anyone want to take France's integration efforts as some sort of model to strive for? They made extremely ignorant and naive polices in the 60's-90's that helped to create the situation they're in now. And as for Sarkozy? During the riots a few years ago the man was antagonizing the rioters, completely dismissing any reasons for the violence, other than "these people are savages" Why should anyone look to him for guidance on this issue.

Wow, it only took over a week for you to get around to one question. That means in a month and a half you'll get around to all of them?

Maybe you could start with #1 - after all, it's the most important within the context of this discussion.

As for picking and choosing what to read - I don't really see expect to hold me to a higher standard than your holding yourself. After all, you've yet to comment on on the article about the European Council of Rabbis. The kettle shouldn't be calling the pot black, as it were . . . I skimmed your links, but I'd definitely give them more time if you didn't spend the last week being evasive. I just don't see why I should afford you the same respect I afford other posters like American Woman, for example, given your ACTIONS, not your opinions.

You get what you give around here - that shouldn't be a radical concept (pun intended) around here.

Points that haven't been addressed by Wulf so far . . . .

1 - Has not explained HOW banning minarets fights Islamic Radicalism

2 - Has not provided examples of Islamic radicalism being a "rapidly increasing threat" in Switzerland

3 - Has not offered an example of Swiss Muslims "trying to change Swiss society into an Islamic one"

4 - Has claimed that far-right nationalist parties are almost as bad as terrorists, yet has not explained why he has no problem supporting a ban drafted and promoted by a far-right nationalist party.

5 - Has not offered an explanation as to why he thinks Jews are overwhelmingly against this ban, if (as he says) Jews and Muslims are eternal enemies.

6 - He supports direct-democracy initiatives which revoke the constitutional rights of certain groups of people (in the Swiss case, this means Muslims) has avoided clarifying if this means he would support a Swiss referendum that revoked the right of men to vote.

Edited December 9, 2009 by JB Globe

[JB Globe]

The Swiss the minarets as a growing Islamic influenece in the Country and the Swiss see what is happening in Britain and France with Islamic radicals and i would think they fear the same happening to them.

I guess this is the closest thing to an explanation as I'm bound to get.

Islamic influence is increasing in Switzerland in the sense that the Muslim population is increasing due to immigration. This is not inherently a bad thing - did America fall apart when it became more Catholic due to massive Irish immigration? (that btw, on a proportional basis, was much, much, greater than anything Europe is experiencing now) Even though Nativists (as they were called) claimed it would bring about the end of America, and would import the problems of Irish conflict en masse - it didn't. So having more Muslims in your country isn't necessarily a bad thing. Can we agree on that? I mean after all, you're not against Muslims in general, right?

Also on that point - we clearly have no problem with Jewish groups campaigning and advocating their concerns in a democratic and civil manner - this doesn't diminish our democracy. Therefor, so long as Muslim groups do the same, and CONTINUE to not try and change laws and cultural norms (except in cases where there is an instance of discrimination as defined by the Swiss Constitution) this is not a concern either.

So what would banning minarets do? For the Swiss public - it would only limit the APPEARANCE of the extent of the Muslim population. It does nothing to change actual numbers, it does nothing to curb the influence of radical elements - in fact it would probably increase their power. Many moderate Swiss who have gone to great lengths to fit in, and so far have never listened to the words of radicals, might start feeling like: "no matter what I do, I'll never be Swiss, they'll never see the difference between me and the radicals" And the radicals now have an easier example to help make their case that Switzerland is against ALL Muslims.

If anything, I think this ban will make things worse, as I've stated before.

Swiss women in particuliar are worried about their hard fought freedoms and liberty are at risk according to this article.

But wouldn't working with women's rights activists WITHIN the Muslim community do more good? How would banning a minaret solve anything?

[M.Dancer]

Swiss women in particuliar are worried about their hard fought freedoms and liberty are at risk according to this article.

Indeed. The women of Appenzell Innerrhoden only got the vote in 199i1...Minarets would definately impede that progress...

Edited December 9, 2009 by M.Dancer

[Guest American Woman]

wulf42, on 09 December 2009 - 04:30 AM, said:

Swiss women in particuliar are worried about their hard fought freedoms and liberty are at risk according to this article.

But wouldn't working with women's rights activists WITHIN the Muslim community do more good? How would banning a minaret solve anything?

The "women's rights" issue is one of the reasons I can understand the fear behind some who voted for the ban. As for how banning a minaret would solve anything, it wouldn't necessarily "solve" anything, but minarets are very visible towers, and therefore they are a visible reminder to some of Islam's view of women, in a democratic society where treating women as second rate citizens goes against its democratic principles. A symbol can be offensive, so if women are put off by the treatment of women in Islam, minarets could be seen as offensive, and something they wouldn't want to be subjected to in their country.

It seems, from what I've read too, that women were more fired up about this and voted in larger numbers, and voted for the ban in larger numbers, than men did. Women have more to lose should a Muslim majority ever arise and start voting accordingly in Switzerland. That may be a far-fetched improbability in your eyes, but to women who not that long ago in history were perceived as second class citizens, it's understandable that they could have stronger emotional feelings attached to this issue; and I don't think that makes them crazy or intolerable or anything else. I do believe we can't take our rights for granted and best guard them at times.

A word about the campaign. I've read repeatedly that the poster encouraging a vote for the ban showed "a sinister-looking, burqa clad, dark-skinned woman," but I see no difference between the woman depicted here and the women in this photograph. Does anyone else?

Edited December 9, 2009 by American Woman

[DogOnPorch]

A word about the campaign. I've read repeatedly that the poster encouraging a vote for the ban showed "a sinister-looking, burqa clad, dark-skinned woman," but I see no difference between the woman depicted here and the women in this photograph. Does anyone else?

Nope.

[Black Dog]

The Swiss the minarets as a growing Islamic influenece in the Country and the Swiss see what is happening in Britain and France with Islamic radicals and i would think they fear the same happening to them. Swiss women in particuliar are worried about their hard fought freedoms and liberty are at risk according to this article.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6936267.ece

In other words, it's a purely symbolic gesture, driven by fear of the other, that will have no real impact on curbing radicalism in the Islamic community or safeguarding the Swiss's "hard-fought" (LOL) rights and freedoms. It's a poke in the eye of all Swiss Muslims, a reminder that Swiss society and the west are unfriendly, if not hostile, toward Muslims, even those who attempt to integrate. As others have stated, this is a move that will only stoke the fires of radicalism. Nic eone.

AW:

The "women's rights" issue is one of the reasons I can understand the fear behind some who voted for the ban. As for how banning a minaret would solve anything, it wouldn't necessarily "solve" anything, but minarets are very visible towers, and therefore they are a visible reminder to some of Islam's view of women, in a democratic society where treating women as second rate citizens goes against its democratic principles. A symbol can be offensive, so if women are put off by the treatment of women in Islam, minarets could be seen as offensive, and something they wouldn't want to be subjected to in their country.

If they want to target buildings that are reminders of retrograde patriarchal attitudes toward women, no religious structure should be safe.

A word about the campaign. I've read repeatedly that the poster encouraging a vote for the ban showed "a sinister-looking, burqa clad, dark-skinned woman," but I see no difference between the woman depicted here and the women in this photograph. Does anyone else?

Let's leave aside for a moment the fact that Swiss Muslims, by most accounts, are mostly of Turkish or Eastern European extraction and quite well integrated, making the burqa an almost unheard of sight in Switzerland and just focus on the imagery. The ominous figure with the shifty, sinister eyes. The minarets (which there are more of in the poster than actually exist in Switzerland) jutting out like missiles, their shadows casting a pall over the Swiss flag. Nosir. Nothing offensive about that. Kinda like how there's no difference between this and this.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Black Dog